draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt   draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-04.txt 
Inter-Domain Routing Z. Li Inter-Domain Routing Z. Li
Internet-Draft S. Zhuang Internet-Draft S. Zhuang
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Intended status: Standards Track Huawei
Expires: May 2, 2021 K. Talaulikar Expires: May 17, 2021 K. Talaulikar
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Google, Inc Google, Inc
J. Tantsura J. Tantsura
Apstra Apstra
G. Mirsky G. Mirsky
ZTE Corp. ZTE Corp.
October 29, 2020 November 13, 2020
BGP Link-State Extensions for Seamless BFD BGP Link-State Extensions for Seamless BFD
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03 draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-04
Abstract Abstract
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) defines a Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) defines a
simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
with large portions of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing with large portions of negotiation aspects eliminated, thus providing
benefits such as quick provisioning as well as improved control and benefits such as quick provisioning as well as improved control and
flexibility to network nodes initiating the path monitoring. The flexibility to network nodes initiating the path monitoring. The
link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF) have been extended to link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF) have been extended to
advertise the Seamless BFD (S-BFD) Discriminators. advertise the Seamless BFD (S-BFD) Discriminators.
skipping to change at page 1, line 47 skipping to change at page 1, line 47
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 2, 2021. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 17, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 27 skipping to change at page 2, line 27
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Problem and Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Problem and Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. BGP-LS Extensions for S-BFD Discriminator . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. BGP-LS Extensions for S-BFD Discriminator . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Manageability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2. Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) [RFC7880] defines Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) [RFC7880] defines
a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD) [RFC5880] with large portions of negotiation aspects (BFD) [RFC5880] with large portions of negotiation aspects
eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as
well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating
the path monitoring. the path monitoring.
skipping to change at page 3, line 37 skipping to change at page 3, line 37
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7880]. This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7880].
3. Problem and Requirement 3. Problem and Requirement
Seamless MPLS [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] extends the core domain Seamless MPLS [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] extends the core domain
and integrates aggregation and access domains into a single MPLS and integrates aggregation and access domains into a single MPLS
domain. In a large network, the core and aggregation networks can be domain. In a large network, the core and aggregation networks can be
organized as different ASes. Although the core and aggregation organized as different ASes. Although the core and aggregation
networks are segmented into different ASes, an E2E LSP can be created networks are segmented into different ASes, an end-to-end label
using hierarchical BGP signaled LSPs based on iBGP labeled unicast switched path (LSP) can be created using hierarchical BGP signaled
within each AS, and eBGP labeled unicast to extend the LSP across AS LSPs based on internal-BGP (IBGP) labeled unicast within each AS, and
external-BGP (EBGP) labeled unicast to extend the LSP across AS
boundaries. This provides a seamless MPLS transport connectivity for boundaries. This provides a seamless MPLS transport connectivity for
any two service end-points across the entire domain. In order to any two service end-points across the entire domain. In order to
detect failures for such end to end services and trigger faster detect failures for such end to end services and trigger faster
protection and/or re-routing, S-BFD MAY be used for the Service Layer protection and/or re-routing, S-BFD MAY be used for the Service Layer
(e.g. for MPLS VPNs, PW, etc. ) or the Transport Layer monitoring. (e.g. for MPLS VPNs, pseudowires, etc. ) or the Transport Layer
This brings up the need for setting up S-BFD session spanning across monitoring. This brings up the need for setting up S-BFD session
AS domains. spanning across AS domains.
In a similar Segment Routing (SR) [RFC8402] multi-domain network, an In a similar Segment Routing (SR) [RFC8402] multi-domain network, an
end to end SR Policy [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] path end to end SR Policy [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] path
may be provisioned between service end-points across domains either may be provisioned between service end-points across domains either
via local provisioning or by a controller or signalled from a Path via local provisioning or by a controller or signalled from a Path
Computation Engine (PCE). Monitoring using S-BFD can similarly be Computation Engine (PCE). Monitoring using S-BFD can similarly be
setup for such a SR Policy. setup for such a SR Policy.
Extending the automatic discovery of S-BFD discriminators of nodes Extending the automatic discovery of S-BFD discriminators of nodes
from within the IGP domain to across the administrative domain using from within the IGP domain to across the administrative domain using
skipping to change at page 5, line 23 skipping to change at page 5, line 23
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | | ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Discriminator n (Optional) | | Discriminator n (Optional) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: S-BFD Discriminators TLV Figure 1: S-BFD Discriminators TLV
where: where:
o Type: 1032 o Type: 1032 (early allocation by IANA)
o Length: variable. Minimum of 4 octets and increments of 4 octets o Length: variable. Minimum of 4 octets and increments of 4 octets
there on for each additional discriminator there on for each additional discriminator
o Discriminators : multiples of 4 octets, each carrying a S-BFD o Discriminators : multiples of 4 octets, each carrying a S-BFD
local discriminator value of the node. At least one discriminator local discriminator value of the node. At least one discriminator
MUST be included in the TLV. MUST be included in the TLV.
The S-BFD Discriminators TLV can only be added to the BGP-LS The S-BFD Discriminators TLV can be added to the BGP-LS Attribute
Attribute associated with the Node NLRI that originates the associated with the Node NLRI that originates the corresponding
corresponding underlying IGP TLV/sub-TLV as described below. This underlying IGP TLV/sub-TLV as described below. This information is
information is derived from the protocol specific advertisements as derived from the protocol specific advertisements as below..
below..
o IS-IS, as defined by the S-BFD Discriminators sub-TLV in o IS-IS, as defined by the S-BFD Discriminators sub-TLV in
[RFC7883]. [RFC7883].
o OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the S-BFD Discriminators TLV in o OSPFv2/OSPFv3, as defined by the S-BFD Discriminators TLV in
[RFC7884]. [RFC7884].
When the node is not running any of the IGPs but running a protocol When the node is not running any of the IGPs but running a protocol
like BGP, then the locally provisioned S-BFD discriminators of the like BGP, then the locally provisioned S-BFD discriminators of the
node MAY be originated as part of the BGP-LS attribute within the node MAY be originated as part of the BGP-LS attribute within the
skipping to change at page 8, line 15 skipping to change at page 8, line 8
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls] [I-D.ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls]
Leymann, N., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Konstantynowicz, Leymann, N., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Konstantynowicz,
M., and D. Steinberg, "Seamless MPLS Architecture", draft- M., and D. Steinberg, "Seamless MPLS Architecture", draft-
ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2014. ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls-07 (work in progress), June 2014.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Voyer, D., Bogdanov, A., and
P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft- P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture", draft-
ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-08 (work in progress), ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-09 (work in progress),
July 2020. November 2020.
[RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and [RFC5706] Harrington, D., "Guidelines for Considering Operations and
Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions", Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions",
RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009, RFC 5706, DOI 10.17487/RFC5706, November 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5706>.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>.
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 20 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/